There is as much evidence for Fairies, Unicorns, Giants, and elves

originally posted by: FamCore
The difference is, people know a Unicorn isn't real. Whereas there are many historic accounts for figures like the man we know as "Jesus". It's not really comparable in that sense. While we don't know if Jesus actually performed miracles or not, there are many many accounts of his existence. Unicorns, not so much.
a reply to: muse7

You realize that unicorns are mentioned in the Christian bible, don't you?

a reply to: muse7

Think of it like this. Notice how God has become silent and doesn't speak to prophets anymore. In modern times, we tend to diagnose people who claim to have talked to god with mental illnesses, namely schizophrenia. It is very likely that the prophets of yore also had these mental illnesses, but superstititious people believed them instead of calling them crazy.

What do you think would happen today if someone came out and said that a burning bush was talking to him about freeing slaves and what not?

originally posted by: FamCore
The difference is, people know a Unicorn isn't real. Whereas there are many historic accounts for figures like the man we know as "Jesus". It's not really comparable in that sense. While we don't know if Jesus actually performed miracles or not, there are many many accounts of his existence. Unicorns, not so much.
a reply to: muse7

"Many many accounts" being just the bible. So really just one (four if you count each gospel separately, but considering that each gospel contradicts each other...) account. There MAY be two secular sources from Josephus and Tacitus, but those are heavily debated and may be forgeries or false attributions.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: FamCore
The difference is, people know a Unicorn isn't real. Whereas there are many historic accounts for figures like the man we know as "Jesus". It's not really comparable in that sense. While we don't know if Jesus actually performed miracles or not, there are many many accounts of his existence. Unicorns, not so much.
a reply to: muse7

"Many many accounts" being just the bible. So really just one (four if you count each gospel separately, but considering that each gospel contradicts each other...) account. There MAY be two secular sources from Josephus and Tacitus, but those are heavily debated and may be forgeries or false attributions.

and what of the accounts pertaining to his miracles?

a reply to: TzarChasm

The bible again. And see those accounts are what make the bible untrustworthy. I always enjoy the Christian cop out, "If you can't trust the Jesus account then you can't trust any other history as well." No... Other historical sources tend not to speak of magical events in their summaries of events.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TzarChasm

The bible again. And see those accounts are what make the bible untrustworthy. I always enjoy the Christian cop out, "If you can't trust the Jesus account then you can't trust any other history as well." No... Other historical sources tend not to speak of magical events in their summaries of events.

there is even less contemporary documentation of his miracles than there are of his historicity?

a reply to: TzarChasm

I certainly don't know of any documentation of his miracles outside the bible. Do you?

originally posted by: FamCore
The difference is, people know a Unicorn isn't real. Whereas there are many historic accounts for figures like the man we know as "Jesus". It's not really comparable in that sense. While we don't know if Jesus actually performed miracles or not, there are many many accounts of his existence. Unicorns, not so much.
a reply to: muse7

Yea....that's the difference between them............

Frankly, I prefer to read about unicorns than jesus. Fun fact: Jesus & the Unicorn are interchangeable symbology.

To the OP

Fairies do exist, they are just out of sight. Other beasts are myths and legends, or animals based on fact but exaggerated and changed through the tradition of story-telling. A unicorn could have derived from antelope, oryx or eland. In 50 years time people will think the gruffalo was real. In today's precise science and rationality we have lost the art of imagination.

en.wikipedia.org...

On God. You'll find out when you die.

Regards

originally posted by: paraphi
On God. You'll find out when you die.

Regards

But by then...it will Be. Too. Late.

DUN DUN DUNNN

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: muse7

How does the fact that some believe in God negatively affect you?
Honest question.

I refer you to history.

originally posted by: FamCore
The difference is, people know a Unicorn isn't real. Whereas there are many historic accounts for figures like the man we know as "Jesus". It's not really comparable in that sense. While we don't know if Jesus actually performed miracles or not, there are many many accounts of his existence. Unicorns, not so much.
a reply to: muse7

How do you know for certain a unicorn isn't real? You don't. It's impossible to prove a negative. On the other hand, there isn't any testable evidence proving that a unicorn is real. The exact same is true of Jesus. There is zero contemporaneous documentation (ie. historical evidence) proving that Jesus ever lived. In other words, not one single person who lived when he allegedly lived wrote that s/he witnessed him living. If you dispute that, name someone who ddi.

It's amazing that Christians haven't researched their own religion and actually believe there is evidence supporting it when there is none.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: FamCore
The difference is, people know a Unicorn isn't real. Whereas there are many historic accounts for figures like the man we know as "Jesus". It's not really comparable in that sense. While we don't know if Jesus actually performed miracles or not, there are many many accounts of his existence. Unicorns, not so much.
a reply to: muse7

"Many many accounts" being just the bible. So really just one (four if you count each gospel separately, but considering that each gospel contradicts each other...) account. There MAY be two secular sources from Josephus and Tacitus, but those are heavily debated and may be forgeries or false attributions.

There are zero contemporaneous sources and those are the only ones that count when it comes to proving that someone actually lived.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TzarChasm

The bible again. And see those accounts are what make the bible untrustworthy. I always enjoy the Christian cop out, "If you can't trust the Jesus account then you can't trust any other history as well." No... Other historical sources tend not to speak of magical events in their summaries of events.

there is even less contemporary documentation of his miracles than there are of his historicity?

There's zero contemporaneous documentation of both.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TzarChasm

I certainly don't know of any documentation of his miracles outside the bible. Do you?

The Biblical accounts are not documentation because they were not written by people who witnessed the "events" first hand. They are simply stories.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: muse7

Sorry, I assumed that with your post looking to discredit religion.

I have asked this before to different people and just want to understand. If you have no belief in God, what motivates you to wish to ask others to question their belief? Why would you even care?

Again, honest question.

And I'm sorry but the whole God thing (regardless of which one) IS a major problem for this planet. It is an idea of something which has never been proven and when people use that idea for financial gain, false hope or just to simply start a war then any sane person may just come to the conclusion that it is a man made idea in order to gain control over people.

Evolution and religion will not work out imo

a reply to: Tangerine

I'm not sure what you are trying to tell me with this post. I'm not really looking to start a "did Jesus exist" discussion with you, because frankly I'm not sure he existed either. There is a possibility that Jesus is an amalgamation of several cult leaders or just one person who developed a cult of personality around his actions. This isn't surprising since cult leaders tend to be charismatic and very influential. Then they perform fake miracles to make it look like they healed people. It's easy to believe that someone is healed in the moment and you don't check up on them a day or two later.

a reply to: Zcustosmorum

And all this time I thought there was a difference between religion and a belief in God. I see many folks here who despise religion, yet still believe in a higher power.

Using logic like that is where the "all Muslims are terrorists" rhetoric comes from.

Quietly believing in a creator has never harmed anyone, but killing in the name of ______ is a different story. There is a difference.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Zcustosmorum

And all this time I thought there was a difference between religion and a belief in God. I see many folks here who despise religion, yet still believe in a higher power.

Using logic like that is where the "all Muslims are terrorists" rhetoric comes from.

Quietly believing in a creator has never harmed anyone, but killing in the name of ______ is a different story. There is a difference.

Well I don't think all Muslims are terrorists, nor do I think all Christians are evil due to the billions that religion has killed throughout the centuries. I do however think believing in something without proof is the height of stupidity, no matter how quietly you do about your beliefs

a reply to: Zcustosmorum

I agree. Proof is subjective in that you have to be intelligent enough to recognize it when it comes along.
Not all do.